Is Petraeus’ Drawdown Part Of The White House’s 2008 Political Strategy?
Is Petraeus’ Drawdown Part Of The White House’s 2008 Political Strategy?
In yesterday’s congressional hearings, Gen. David Petraeus suggested that he will withdraw 30,000 troops from Iraq next summer:
Based on all this and on the further progress we believe we can achieve over the next few months, I believe that we will be able to reduce our forces to the pre-surge level of brigade combat teams by next summer without jeopardizing the security gains that we have fought so hard to achieve.
Petraeus claimed that “progress” in Iraq allows the United States to begin withdrawing troops. But in reality, security and political progress in Iraq is nonexistent. Petraeus, who has said he wants to stay in Iraq for 9-10 years, is in fact reducing troop levels next summer because the escalation has overstretched and overburdened the military to its breaking point.
Under Petraeus’s plan, troops will be finishing this “token” withdrawal right before the Nov. 2008 elections, and the administration appears to be planning to take political advantage of this fact.
In July, Rove spoke at the Aspen Ideas Festival and reportedly stated, “Iraq may not be a big issue in the next election because…troops will be coming home by then.”
But while the Bush administration is going to withdraw a nominal amount of troops before the elections, it then plans to continue staying the course. The Aspen Daily News reported in July on more of the White House’s strategy:
Overall, Rove said the goal was to make the “U.S. combat footprint smaller,” but he also surmised later in the interview that when the next president is sworn in on Jan. 21, 2009, plenty of American troops would still be in Iraq.
Recall that Bush’s strategy on Iraq is to “get us in a position where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence,” and to ultimately “stay longer.”
On Thursday, President Bush will address the nation on Iraq and announce that he will be, not surprisingly, accepting Petraeus’s drawdown recommendations.
UPDATE: Today when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) asked Petraeus whether it was “highly likely that “a year from now we’re going to have at least 100,000 troops in Iraq?,” Petraeus replied unequivocally: “That is probably the case. Yes, sir.”
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
74 Responses to “Is Petraeus’ Drawdown Part Of The White House’s 2008 Political Strategy?”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
You know Amanda, I wish you'd warn us before posting a picture of that ugly mug.
Scared the hell out of me.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:34 pmYour right since thinkprogress knows more then a military general.
Yea that really convinces me. You libs just want the war to fail so you can blame the repubs. Not finally when there is progress on the ground you lebs wanna pull you so you can make the repubs look bad. Nice to see that you care about politics more then you care about your country.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:34 pmAnd yes, clearly this is part of the White House strategy. In fact, the surge was a strategy. Not to bring stabilization to Iraq, but to give them some troops to pull out.
They pumped 30,000 more troops in, so they could "throw us a bone" later, by pulling them out.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:36 pmLooks like p got whacked again.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:38 pmImpeach!
September 11th, 2007 at 5:38 pmYea that really convinces me. You libs just want the war to fail so you can blame the repubs. .
Comment by GitmoRules! — September 11, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
Wrong bootlicker.
You pukes screwed up, and now, after 4 years of bumbling incompetence which has resulted in this disaster, you want to blame YOUR failures, on us.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:38 pmNope. There is no draw down of troops. This is the end of the surge because the surge simply cannot be sustained anymore. Of course that will not stop them using the end of the surge as a political tool.
With the Republicans everything is a political tool: If there is another attack on American soil, it proves they were right about the threat to America. If there is no attack on American soil, they were right because Bush has kept us safe..... Heads they win, Tails, we lose.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:40 pmComment by GitmoRules! — September 11, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
the war IS already a failure and the republicans ARE to blame.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:40 pmConsidering we just want to fix your mistakes, you should try showing a little appreciation.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
If I remember correctly, many democrats also voted in favor of the war...
September 11th, 2007 at 5:43 pmIts only a failure if we listen to you libs and leave THEN it would be a failure. We've turned the corner and now things are starting to go our way. So no the war is not a failure. You libs cant see that cause your a bunch of quiters
September 11th, 2007 at 5:43 pmAgain, the progressives' mindset is so mentally disordered that no one except those afflicted with leftarded, mental illness can make sense out of their articles lately! TP posts this fraudulent article with the apparent, shocked outrage that Patreus' drawdown is really part of some sinister, Bush strategy to engage in a long-term presence in Iraq. Yet, this misconception of the Patreus drawdown can only appeal to mentally ill progs who have no appreciation for clarity or rationale. I'll do some charity by enlightening these pitiful progs. The reason the drawdown was recommended is because the SURGE WORKED. The SURGE WORKED so well that the troops put in for the surge could be withdrawn to pre-surge numbers. The reason the pre-surge numbers stay in Iraq for the conceivable future is to ensure the hard sacrifice of the US during the surge is secured. See, progs, how easy it is to understand situations if you use logic instead of insanity to interpret them??
September 11th, 2007 at 5:43 pmTP posts this fraudulent article with the apparent, shocked outrage that Patreus’ drawdown is really part of some sinister, Bush strategy to engage in a long-term presence in Iraq.
Comment by StickallprogsinGitmounlesstheyrepent — September 11, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
thats because it is.
BetrayUS is just an administration watercarrier. Nothing more.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:47 pmIf I remember correctly, many democrats also voted in favor of the war…
Comment by François — September 11, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
That's an oversimplification, Frankie baby. Sort of a "with us or against us" sort of simplification. Try again.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:47 pmYou libs just want the war to fail so you can blame the repubs. - GitmoDrools
News flash: It's already failed, by every measure conceivable. Only you 5%-ers still think Bush can succeed. That's right, 5% in a poll with a margin of error of 3% think Bush can manage this fruitless endeavor.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:48 pmhttp://www.commondreams.org/headlines/080900-01.htm
Yupp, I was write, lives mean nothing to a hater like Mighty Aphrodite [Mr P]
Why do Republicans hate the troops?
To win elections.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:50 pmBart, you're crazy. Give up.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:51 pmIf I remember correctly, many democrats also voted in favor of the war…
Comment by François — September 11, 2007 @ 5:43 pm
You remember incorrectly, as usual. No Democrats or Republicans voted for war. Bush unilaterally decided to wave his teeny dick around. the vote was for the Authorization foe the Use of Military Force IF the UN standardards weren't met. Bush decided not to wait for the UN standards to be met or not met, he decided he would do what he wanted, not what the Congress, the people of the United States, the UN or the Iraqis wanted, just what the little failed oilman piece of shit wanted, breaking international and domestic law, and killing thousands of innocent people in the process. So, frenchy, you are wrong, again and again, no surprise. You French never did learn to respect your betters, and you obviously don't know shit about American law. You're as uninformed and arrogant as Bush, in fact. And you stink of garlic.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:52 pmIf I remember correctly, many democrats also voted in favor of the war…Comment by François
They, the elected Democrats, voted to use military force to enforce a UN/US resolution. There has never been a declarationof war.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:53 pmhughjazz! Good to see ya sexy! I'd love to stay and chat but you're retarded and I'm leaving. Have fun with your boyfriend barty!
September 11th, 2007 at 5:54 pmthoughts from randi's show...
could dubya be keeping us in iraq to avoid the consequences of the
investigations, to avoid impeachment?
so, are the troops being held hostage?
(have i got that right, torqua? you listening?)
September 11th, 2007 at 5:54 pm...
Why do Republicans hate the troops?
To win elections.
Comment by Vesica Piscium — September 11, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
Republicans hate themselves because of their closeted homosexuality. Until they learn to love themselves for who they are they will spread nothing but evil around this country.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:54 pmEVERYTHING is part of the white house political strategy or at least they try to make everything political. On the other hand, why would the white house need a 2008 political strategy? They're done (Praise God).
September 11th, 2007 at 5:55 pmmany democrats also voted in favor of the war…
Comment by François — September 11, 2007
The salus populi does not vote on war.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:55 pmBart, you’re crazy. Give up.
Comment by François — September 11, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
No, that would be your mom, for not having an abortion. But if you think you can make me "give up", then bring it on.
Mighty Mouth.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:58 pmhughjazz! Good to see ya sexy! I’d love to stay and chat but you’re retarded and I’m leaving. Have fun with your boyfriend barty!
Comment by François — September 11, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
this can be translated as:
hughjazz. good to see you. I'd love to debate this with you, but since you have already proven me wrong I will make a sophomoric insult and run away.
At least one troll has learned its lesson.
September 11th, 2007 at 5:59 pmThat picture...I've seen better heads on beer.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:00 pmAww poor Mighty Mouth has been outted for the Troop hater it is.
A sociopath that puts our troops lives AFTER politics.
Mighty Mendastic Aphrodite.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:01 pmBetrayUS is just an administration watercarrier. Nothing more.
Comment by BARTLEBEE — September 11, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
Oh, he's much more; he's a mouthpiece, a shill, a borderline traitor, and a failure, as well as a watercarrier.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:04 pm"Recall that Bush’s strategy on Iraq is to “get us in a position where the presidential candidates will be comfortable about sustaining a presence,†and to ultimately “stay longer.â€"
No doubt this is how bush thinks his "legacy" will be saved: if he can just make sure the occupation gets handed off to the next sucker-in-chief, cognitive dissonance on *their* part will help transform the whole of OIF into "a good idea" in the eyes of history.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:05 pmWhy are we in Iraq?
September 11th, 2007 at 6:07 pm30,000 troop withdrawal will never happen because of Iran.
They want to bomb Iran.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:08 pmWhy are we in Iraq?
Comment by J — September 11, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
Because Bushco had to flex its muscles, and Iraq was the weakest country they could find that they could steal oil from. they were, not surprisingly, dead wrong, so we are still there, because, like 4th-graders, the minds in the White House refuse to admit failure and defeat.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:09 pmI'm an idiot.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:09 pmLuntzxian emotional irrational rant ignored.
Comment by Vesica Piscium — September 11, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
p, you never fail to sound stupid enough. never. you are as dependable as the baby shit you spout.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:11 pm"Under Petraeus’s plan, troops will be finishing this “token†withdrawal right before the Nov. 2008 elections, and the administration appears to be planning to take political advantage of this fact."
Leave the troops there, you whine, get them out, you whine. ;)
September 11th, 2007 at 6:11 pmVesica Piscium hijacked by Americ hater Mighty PEE— September 11, 2007
You always know when you win an argument against Pee, he starts flooding and name jacking. LMAO.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:12 pmComment by upright left — September 11, 2007
It was a waste of troops, time and money. Thet troops are already worn down from repeated tours, this is not supporting them. Its using them for political leverage.
Repignicans, and UL, hate the troops, just like Nixon.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:15 pmComment by Vesica Piscium — September 11, 2007 @ 6:15 pm
Did I say anything was supporting the troops? I merely pointed out, leave the troops you whine, get them out, you whine. Quite a few posts ya made here without using Luntz. Branching out? ;)
September 11th, 2007 at 6:19 pmLeave them in to be killed, we whine. Promise to take them out after another thousand are dead, we whine (and it is, after all, a Bushian promise, sure to be broken). Why do lefties care about the troops? It's weird, Republicans don't care about the troops. What is it about lefties that makes them care if Americans live or die so Bush can make more money and weaken America further? I guess lefties are the patriots in this country, which makes sense, since it was fonded as a LIBERAL democratic republic, by liberals, with liberal attitudes and ideas. That's why it worked so well, because it was liberal. Now it's failing, because it has turned conservative. conservative=failure, liberal=success. That was easy.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:21 pmComment by upright left — September 11, 2007
You miss the point, as usual.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:22 pmget them out, you whine. Quite a few posts ya made here without using Luntz. Branching out? ;)
Comment by upright left — September 11, 2007 @ 6:19 pm
nobody's gotten them out, loser. so your whole post is a lie and an idiotic, easily dismissed one at that.
nice try, moron.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:22 pmI overrate myself.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:24 pmIt’s one of my 10 vocabulary words. I was actually awarded a Ph.D. at a crappy liberal university by saying ‘luntz’ ten times. It was a long four years.
Comment by Vesica Piscium — September 11, 2007 @ 6:23 pm
8 more than p knows.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:25 pmI over-ate again, that smell is me
September 11th, 2007 at 6:26 pmSo what if Republicans kill troops, their poor, not rich like me, Gods hater of life and earth that can only regurgiate 'borrowed' phrases from a hater like Coulter.
Im like Paris Hilton on Meth acting like Coulter.
Anybody got a car I can drive drunk and stoned in?
September 11th, 2007 at 6:27 pmDo I sound intelligent, upright left? I hope I don't fall into the category of a FAKE INTELLECTUAL.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:29 pmI took one political science class and know is I learning
I read a book two!
September 11th, 2007 at 6:33 pmFrancios: "If I remember correctly, many democrats also voted in favor of the war…"
You can be excused for a faulty memory since our mainstream media has never made this clear, but no, they didn't vote for war. They voted for a resolution which called upon Bush to let the UN inspections take their course, go back to the U.N. for a second opinion, and use force as a last possible resort. The resolution also stipulated that Bush would have to give to congress, in writing, the proof that Saddam possessed WMD's. Needless to say, the Bush administration violated the resolution, didn't live up to its terms and, for some reason, the "liberal media" has never held them accountable for this.... but we do mindlessly repeate the mantra, "The dems also voted for the war..."
September 11th, 2007 at 6:34 pmMy daddy pays for everything. He says Im his little welfare child!
Tee Hee,
Toodles Im off to the beach. I sure hopes them seagulls dont pick my scrawny bones up and carry me off to some shrimp trawler again!
September 11th, 2007 at 6:36 pmYou libs just want the war to fail so you can blame the repubs. .
Comment by GitmoRules! — September 11, 2007
It is the fault of the Repugnants.
Now, get back to work re-arranging the deck chairs, the good Republican ship Lollipop is heading towards that giant snowcone up ahead.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:45 pmWatch out for Iran and Russia. If these two collaborate we will see trouble...
September 11th, 2007 at 6:46 pmYou always know when you win an argument against Pee, he starts flooding and name jacking. LMAO.
Comment by Vesica Piscium — September 11, 2007 @ 6:12 pm
It's rewarding to have him steal your name isn't it? Of course everything with his name gets deleted. Which is better still.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:47 pmIt's pretty sad when the United States has an administration so dishonest that the majority of the American people don't believe what they say, nor do they believe a military leader who is speaking on their behalf.
Very, very sad.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:47 pmThe majority of Americans didn't believe Bill Clinton once upon a time too.
September 11th, 2007 at 6:57 pmIf yall don't think Rove will still function as a strategist to the WH, think again.
September 11th, 2007 at 7:04 pmIt is shameful that Bush and Rove are willing to use American troops for political gain in the 2008 elections. Bush only cares for his own political survival, if he cared about the troops he would not use them as political pawns.
September 11th, 2007 at 7:08 pmThe progs’ mindset is so mentally disordered that no one except those afflicted with leftarded, mental illness can make sense out of their articles lately! TP posts this fraudulent article with the apparent, shocked outrage that Patreus’ drawdown is really part of some sinister, Bush strategy to engage in a long-term presence in Iraq. Yet, this misconception of the Patreus drawdown can only appeal to mentally ill progs who have no appreciation for clarity or rationale. I’ll do some charity by enlightening these pitiful progs. The reason the drawdown was recommended is because the SURGE WORKED. The SURGE WORKED so well that the troops put in for the surge could be withdrawn to pre-surge numbers. The reason the pre-surge numbers stay in Iraq for the conceivable future is to ensure the hard sacrifice of the US during the surge is secured. See, progs, how easy it is to understand situations if you use logic instead of insanity to interpret them??
September 11th, 2007 at 7:11 pmWhat a joke--now this is part of their "strategy" as opposed to what it really is--
September 11th, 2007 at 7:13 pmthe goddamned military has been torn asunder by this president and the lame asses advising him. Too bad there's no mutiny.
I guess to the modern conservative authoritative personality, if you simply keep repeating the mantra "the surge worked," it will have magically worked. You don't need any empirical data to back it up. You just say it over and over again..... like magic!
September 11th, 2007 at 7:24 pmHas anyone asked the Iraqis if they think that the surge has worked? Oh, they have!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6983841.stm
September 11th, 2007 at 7:54 pm
AP: "Democrats had anticipated that a larger number of Republicans by now would have turned against Bush on the war because of grim poll numbers and the upcoming 2008 elections.
If Republican support for the war holds, as it might for now, Democrats would have to soften their approach if they want to pass an anti-war proposal. But they remain under substantial pressure by voters and politically influential anti-war groups to settle for nothing less than ordering troop withdrawals or cutting off money for the war — legislation that has little chances of passing."
September 11th, 2007 at 8:05 pmRet. Col. Jack Ripper: Is that somehow unlike your manta that we can't win.
September 11th, 2007 at 8:07 pmPetraeus's performance has given Bush what he wanted...a reason for Republicans to not jump ship. The reality is...barring some major catastrophic event in Iraq or Iran....the course of the Iraq war will be decided in the 2008 elections. Unfortunately, I don't see any realistic alternatives on the horizon.....just rhetoric and positioning.
September 11th, 2007 at 8:09 pmThe TREASONOUS southern cuntfederate flag loving Graham...
...(who's politically DEAD EVEN in S.C. the red state of inbred idiots)...
...also asked Betraeus if it "was worth the deaths of 60 troops and $9 billion per month?"...
..and Betraeus responded "yessir"...
...what scummy a*s TRAITORS!
...both of them know full well that the U.S. will NOT be able to HOLD ONTO IRAQ!
...they're going to have to leave when Bushiva and L'il Dick are run out of town...
...the DLC is in on this bullsh*t too...
...the profiteering and trying to stall for time while they figure out...
...how to stop Iran, Russia and China from filling the power vacuum...
...the game is up on you stupid a*sholes, you're going to be copulated...
...worse than you've EVER been in history...
...because you refused to do the right thing...
...MAKE the BUSHITES PAY!
September 11th, 2007 at 8:17 pmTime to take back the country…
…from the sick fascist conned’selfserving TRAITORS…
…they’re your:
family members
neighbors
friends
co-workers
…and they’re dangerous…
September 11th, 2007 at 8:18 pmOf course it's part of the political strategy. DUH!
Bush wants (or rather, he is being instructed by the republican party) to be able to declare victory in Iraq, right before the elections. (whether it is true or not, he just needs to spin it that way)
But more importantly, he wants to leave final withdrawl for the next president, because the he knows there's no way to do it without leaving a big mess, and he'd rather have the next (possibly democratic) president take the blame. All he has to do is spin it as a victory, or at least that there is still a chance for victory. Then when the next (possibly democratic) president withdraws, he/she will take the blame for the mess.
September 11th, 2007 at 8:58 pmIMPEACH THE BASTARD!!!
Kinda lost interest here for a while, but passing by, I read( tried to read ), a post or two by gitmo... What hard work it must be for you to type those ideas of yours. Your sentence structure, spelling, and thought processing are a disaster. We use to enjoy some of the trolls who slithered thru here, but, wow, trolls of late are pathetic. Please, don't attempt to reply. It will only intensify the spotlight on your sorry Britney Spearslike appearance showcasing NO talent...CFF...Oh, go ahead. What the hell. You amuse us, a little.
September 11th, 2007 at 8:59 pmEvery step this appointed President takes is part of Rove's political strategery!
September 11th, 2007 at 9:27 pmLawrence Rafferty
arguewithmydad.com
On Thursday, President Bush will address the nation on Iraq and announce that he will be, not surprisingly, accepting Petraeus’s drawdown recommendations.
But doesn't such an advanced disclosure of our plans benefit the enemy???
September 12th, 2007 at 12:00 amSummer of 08, back to the levels of the previous 4 years. Wow! What outstanding progress. Back to square one and only 500 American dead and a couple of billion dollars deeper. Impeachment is no longer an option, thanks in a large part to the spineless dems afraid of lame duck, but also not a fitting punishment for chimp and cheney. Execute these traitors!!!!!!!
September 12th, 2007 at 2:22 amYea, when the ragheads hit DC you VERY FUNNY leftist are going to have shit all over your faces; but then a shitty face liberal looks no different than a raghead. Then what are all these poor, underprivileged folks without health insurance and welfare going to do? Won't matter then will it? Maybe the ragheads will have pity and slit your throat really fast or stick a grenade up your great sphincter, YO!!!!
September 12th, 2007 at 3:19 amIt seems like the right wing nut's have begun to attack in force. Let us never forget how Bushie and his loyal Bushies lied to the American populace about WMD's and how dangerous Saadam was.
To sustain his illegal occupation he is offering young men $20,000 tax free dollars to enlist or reenlist. It makes for his best effort to send the poor and under privleged to fight this Quagmire!!
There was even talk about giving Illegal Immigrants citizenship if his Immigration bill passed and they enlisted.
The Army has met or exceeded their quota the last two months due to buying an Army!
I served my country for twenty four years through two war's and a cold war. When I first enlisted in 1949, My base pay was $75.00 a month, so I did not serve for fiscal purposes.
G.W. Bush is by far the most catastrophic thing to happen to this country, Far exceeding 9/11 of which I still believe he knew was coming.
I say this because of his Knowing about the first plane to hit the tower before going into the school and saying " Must have been a bad pilot", Then when being informed of the second plane, SAT ON A CHILD'S CHAIR FOR SEVEN MINUTES BEFORE GOING TO AF1 AND FLYING WEST, NOT EAST!!!
You rightwing nut's who adore DUMBYA (25%) have been brainwashed. You are the same kind of people whom the Chineese were able to brainwash during the Korean War!!!!
Lest we forget, 30,000 + dead and wounded young American's. At least 100,000 Iraqi men, women and CHILDREN dead.
In the word's of Senator Hagel, "For What"!!!!!!!
September 12th, 2007 at 1:55 pmGeneral Petreus’s cautious strategy was cleverly based on his vast experience and knowledge of Gorilla and Insurgent strategy, laid out in the fundamentals of Mao Tse Tung. "never fight a battle unless victory is assured"
The General is an honorable American, ..But he is no fool he and the administration focused the surges military goals on those military objectives that were most attainable and in the end would not harm their plan to remain entrenched in the area.
Examples of this are-
1) In Anbar their successes politically were already attained before the surge
2) Keeping casualties low was a major political concern and a simply matter of keeping his troops away from hot spots. mainly focused on local base security and a show of force in a predictable peaceful Anbar
This, in my humble is a very correct strategy if you plan to stay the course of 5 years. However allot can happen in 5 years as past insurgencies have proved.
September 16th, 2007 at 1:07 pmIn the end is it worth our boys lives and trillion dollars?